Eddie Zosky

[2009mvp]

He's not a SS as in he never should have been put at the position in the first place. It's a defense first position.

So you're happy about how keeping Cesar Izturis and dealing Young worked out? Hell, maybe AA should see if the Marlins want Reyes back for Hech since it's a defense first position. Dumb questions? Perhaps, but that's the same obtuse thinking you're approaching this with.

Jeter is similar, he's all bat and no defense,

All bat no defense = just THE GREATEST SHORTSTOP OF THE LAST 15 YEARS (well, besides A-Rod if you wanna put him there).

when a guy is worse at short than Jeter, and the general consensus is that he's a good SS, when the numbers clearly state otherwise, that's where I see the problem.

That he was/is a poor fielding SS? Who's denying that part?

People loved Young for the position he played, and you yourself pointed out his supposed value. He holds value IF he can play defense too.

He could have held more value if he could have played better defense, he can and did still hold value while playing poor D.

Otherwise, he's just another Adam Dunn. The value diminishes considerably when the guy sucks at half the game.

Adam Dunn belongs nowhere near this conversation. You're talking about complete opposite ends of the defensive spectrum there.

[Halladay]

So you're happy about how keeping Cesar Izturis and dealing Young worked out? Hell, maybe AA should see if the Marlins want Reyes back for Hech since it's a defense first position. Dumb questions? Perhaps, but that's the same obtuse thinking you're approaching this with.

When did I say I was happy with the deal? you guys seem to be confusing me being bitter with me not caring about a deal that happened ages go. It's not relevant in my mind whether we dealt him for scraps or someone else did. You keep putting words in my mouth here, Hech? when did I mention him? I said Escobar and Reyes aren't miles apart because, ya know, they aren't. That's reality.

All bat no defense = just THE GREATEST SHORTSTOP OF THE LAST 15 YEARS (well, besides A-Rod if you wanna put him there).

Continually missing the point. Jeter and Young shouldn't have been playing SS to begin with. Thats where the problem lies. Had they been playing their proper positions, the conversation is completely different. Neither were that good at a position that requires defense as it's a premium defensive position. And yes, Arod is without question the best SS of his era. Not even close. Pretty much hits the nail on the head with putting players in positions they should be playing rather than positions they've been stuck playing because of some ego by the player or manager or GM. Stick Jeter at another spot, where he should be, and things look a lot different. Still a great hitter, I'm not denying that.

That he was/is a poor fielding SS? Who's denying that part?

More about compensating here.

He could have held more value if he could have played better defense, he can and did still hold value while playing poor D.

Again, completely missing the point. If a guys defense is so bad that for every run he produces and his defense creates one for the opposition, how valuable is the guy really? You can't cherry pick offense and defense.

Adam Dunn belongs nowhere near this conversation. You're talking about complete opposite ends of the defensive spectrum there.

It was to make a point that offense doesn't always compensate. Dunn is an extreme case but an example nonetheless.

[Bob_at_york]

this thread was suppose to be about Zosky right?

I remember being at spring training as a kid. My Dad told me Zosky was going to be the next great Jays SS. I got him to sign my hat. I still have it somewhere.

[jrice9]

Michael Young while being a bad shortstop still was a pretty valuable player for the Rangers when he played the position.

Your talking about UZR WAR, so fangraphs had him at 2.9 WAR (practically 3 WAR giving him benefit of the doubt here) or better for 4 straight seasons. He accumulated 14.4 WAR during the 2003-2006 seasons. Thats damn valuable and worth having.

Consider the Jays got out of their starting shortstops 0.2 WAR in 2003 (Woodward), 0.2 in 2004 (Chris Gomez), 0.5 in 2005 (Russ Adams), -0.3 WAR in 2006 (Johnny Mac). That is only talking about his prime years. Losing Young cost the Jays about 13 extra wins at least and in 06 might have cost them a real shot at the playoffs.

Also, I think regardless of position (besides catcher) offense is more important than defense when compared to league average especialyl considering the lack of completeness with defensive stats

[Krylian]

Zosky had one of the strongest infield arms I had ever seen. Only Shawon Dunston's was stronger. He was suppose to be very well above average defensively and they hoped he'd be able to provide a solid line-drive kind of bat that would be average for the position...but his defense was his calling card.

Ended up not being able to hit worth a lick.

[2009mvp]

When did I say I was happy with the deal? you guys seem to be confusing me being bitter with me not caring about a deal that happened ages go. It's not relevant in my mind whether we dealt him for scraps or someone else did. You keep putting words in my mouth here, Hech? when did I mention him? I said Escobar and Reyes aren't miles apart because, ya know, they aren't. That's reality.

You said SS is a defense first position and guys who give back runs with the glove shouldn't be there, regardless of how much they hit. By that line of thinking, Izturis and Hechavarria would be better shortstops than Young and Reyes, no? I'm trying to find where you draw the line here, but based on your Jeter stance (again, ONE OF THE BEST TO EVER PLAY THE POSITION) it can't be at those guys.

Continually missing the point. Jeter and Young shouldn't have been playing SS to begin with. Thats where the problem lies. Had they been playing their proper positions, the conversation is completely different.

But Jeter did play SS, and he's had a tremendous career. I'm not understanding why he shouldn't have been playing SS when he did play SS and produced the kind of value that few who've ever walked this earth have.

Neither were that good at a position that requires defense as it's a premium defensive position. And yes, Arod is without question the best SS of his era. Not even close. Pretty much hits the nail on the head with putting players in positions they should be playing rather than positions they've been stuck playing because of some ego by the player or manager or GM. Stick Jeter at another spot, where he should be, and things look a lot different. Still a great hitter, I'm not denying that.

Being inferior to a once in a generation type of star like A-Rod ain't really a knock on anyone.

More about compensating here.



Again, completely missing the point. If a guys defense is so bad that for every run he produces and his defense creates one for the opposition, how valuable is the guy really?

If that was the case with either guy, then you'd have a point. But it's not, and it's not even close to being true. ****, Young had years where he was giving up ~20 runs in the field (according to UZR, which...meh) and still managed to put up a 4.5 win season on the strength of his bat.

You can't cherry pick offense and defense.

EXACTLY!!! Now take that advice and stop 'cherry-picking' defense. You're saying they shouldn't be SS's because they give back runs defensively, yet you're ignoring how many runs they produce over the average SS with the bat.

It was to make a point that offense doesn't always compensate. Dunn is an extreme case but an example nonetheless.

Dunn was hilariously bad in LF with the Reds and still put up solid seasons there. But again, we're talking about the least important positions on the defensive spectrum there, while SS is at the other end. It's irrelevant.

[Twitchy]

Wait are people arguing that Jeter shouldn't have been a SS because he had bad D? That's nuts. Yeah, Jeter was on the lower end of defensive SS's but the bat was so good compared to the other SS's that he was still among the best in the league. He's what, a top 5-6 SS of all time?

You live with the poor defence if they're productive enough with the bat. If you're looking for the reason why the Yanks have consistently been in the playoffs, it's because they had an insane advantage of having an elite hitter at a position where there generally isn't much production.

Just for fun - since 1996 (Jeter's first full year) the Yankees have got 75.6 WAR from their shortstops. The next closest team? That would be the Rangers at 62.5, who have been lucky enough to have A-Rod, Michael Young and Andrus at the position during that time. And they STILL weren't as good as Jeter, despite all 3 virtually playing the position during their primes (in fairness A-Rod was better but he didn't play more than a few years in Texas). Only 6 teams even got 50 WAR from their shortstops since Jeter took over. The Jays got 38.3 WAR from their SS's, so over a 17 year period the Yankees got nearly double the production we got there. Let that sink in, along with the fact that the Jays SS had 66 or so UZR while the Yanks sat at -150.

That's a massive advantage, and it should be pretty clear why Jeter was so valuable at short. And, for that matter, why the Yankees were so good.

[Halladay]

Wait are people arguing that Jeter shouldn't have been a SS because he had bad D? That's nuts. Yeah, Jeter was on the lower end of defensive SS's but the bat was so good compared to the other SS's that he was still among the best in the league. He's what, a top 5-6 SS of all time?

You live with the poor defence if they're productive enough with the bat. If you're looking for the reason why the Yanks have consistently been in the playoffs, it's because they had an insane advantage of having an elite hitter at a position where there generally isn't much production.

Just for fun - since 1996 (Jeter's first full year) the Yankees have got 75.6 WAR from their shortstops. The next closest team? That would be the Rangers at 62.5, who have been lucky enough to have A-Rod, Michael Young and Andrus at the position during that time. And they STILL weren't as good as Jeter, despite all 3 virtually playing the position during their primes (in fairness A-Rod was better but he didn't play more than a few years in Texas). Only 6 teams even got 50 WAR from their shortstops since Jeter took over. The Jays got 38.3 WAR from their SS's, so over a 17 year period the Yankees got nearly double the production we got there. Let that sink in, along with the fact that the Jays SS had 66 or so UZR while the Yanks sat at -150.

That's a massive advantage, and it should be pretty clear why Jeter was so valuable at short. And, for that matter, why the Yankees were so good.

Okay, so lets say a 25 year old Jeter is dealt to your team. You can put him at any position you want. Where do you put him?

[miller74]

Okay, so lets say a 25 year old Jeter is dealt to your team. You can put him at any position you want. Where do you put him?

If we are going to win 4 World Series rings he can play short and pitch 3 innings each game if he wants

[Twitchy]

Okay, so lets say a 25 year old Jeter is dealt to your team. You can put him at any position you want. Where do you put him?

Unless I had a 25 year old A-Rod already on my team, Jeter would be my shortstop.

[Halladay]

Unless I had a 25 year old A-Rod already on my team, Jeter would be my shortstop.

Even with how ****** he is on defense? why? why not put him in left? first? dh? why a premium position? makes no sense.

[Twitchy]

Even with how ****** he is on defense? why? why not put him in left? first? dh? why a premium position? makes no sense.

Excellent question, one I was hoping you would ask.

A shortstop gets a position adjustment of 7.5 runs.
A LF gets a position adjustment of -7.5 runs.
A 1B gets a position adjustment of -12.5 runs.
A DH gets a position adjustment of -17.5 runs.

By playing Jeter at LF he loses 15 runs of value just based on his position alone. So if he was worth 7.5 WAR as a SS, he's now worth 6 WAR in LF. Even if he is a neutral defender, which is pretty fair given he has no experience at the position, he is at best worth 7 WAR. So to be worth more than he was at short he essentially needs to be a GG LF. And that's to break even with what he was as a SS.

Keep in mind that's ONLY if Jeter is -10 on defence. If Jeter is something like -5, then there isn't a chance he's more valuable as a LF even if he plays defensively like Carl Crawford did.

By playing Jeter at 1B he loses 20 runs based on positional adjustments and goes from 7.5 WAR to 5.5 WAR. So once again, if he was -10 UZR at SS and you make him a neutral defender at first, he's now only worth 6.5 WAR. He'd have to be a GG calibre 1B to break even with the value he was at SS, and that's assuming Jeter was a -10 UZR SS. Once again, if he's even slightly better than that, then there is no way he'd be better at first than at SS.

By playing Jeter at DH he now loses 25 runs of value. So again, a 7.5 WAR SS becomes a 5 WAR DH. Even if you add back 10 runs for defence, you're looking at Jeter as being a 6 WAR DH vs a 7.5 WAR SS.

Clearly, Jeter is at his best as a SS. But that's only looking at Jeter's value to a team. What about the other players?

Left fielders generally hit better than SS's. Don't even need WAR or anything to show this. So by putting Jeter at SS, you give yourself the best two hitters on your team. If you put Jeter at left field, you're pushing a superior hitter out of your lineup, and an inferior option at SS. Think of Matt Holliday as an example. If you have Jeter here, you lose both the glove of Matt Holliday and his superior bat. So you've downgraded on offence and defence in left, and now you've downgraded offence at SS but still not gaining enough defensively to make it worthwhile.

Same deal with DH - think of your David Ortiz here. He can't play any other position. By playing Jeter here, you now have pushed a quality hitter to the bench (as the DH can't play in the field), AND put an inferior option to Jeter at SS.

The bottom line is, despite Jeter's lack of defensive value at SS, his value remains HIGHEST at SS. That's even when you factor in the poor defence. By having Jeter play at a premium position where that kind of offence generally doesn't exist, you allow your team to have the best player at SS, the best player at LF, and the best hitter at DH. Having Jeter at any position other than SS means you're using your second best SS at short, and pushes a key bat, either your LF, 1B or your DH, to the bench. And if the LF/1B is a quality defender you lose those runs saved, and if your DH is a superior hitter to Jeter (which he should be), you lose those runs on offence too. And while your other SS will save more runs on D, he still won't make up for Jeter's overall value because there isn't a chance in hell he comes close to providing as many runs with the bat as Jeter will.

Since 1990 the only player to provide more value as a SS was A-Rod, and nobody else even comes close. Moving Jeter off SS is the single worst possible move anybody could make on a baseball team, because outside of A-Rod, nobody has been better than Jeter at SS.

[miller74]

Even with how ****** he is on defense? why? why not put him in left? first? dh? why a premium position? makes no sense.

Cleary his defense doesnt stop his team from winning the world series, what else matters

[JaysFan87]

Okay, so lets say a 25 year old Jeter is dealt to your team. You can put him at any position you want. Where do you put him?

SS and its no question.

[Korac]

Excellent question, one I was hoping you would ask.

A shortstop gets a position adjustment of 7.5 runs.
A LF gets a position adjustment of -7.5 runs.
A 1B gets a position adjustment of -12.5 runs.
A DH gets a position adjustment of -17.5 runs.

By playing Jeter at LF he loses 15 runs of value just based on his position alone. So if he was worth 7.5 WAR as a SS, he's now worth 6 WAR in LF. Even if he is a neutral defender, which is pretty fair given he has no experience at the position, he is at best worth 7 WAR. So to be worth more than he was at short he essentially needs to be a GG LF. And that's to break even with what he was as a SS.

Keep in mind that's ONLY if Jeter is -10 on defence. If Jeter is something like -5, then there isn't a chance he's more valuable as a LF even if he plays defensively like Carl Crawford did.

By playing Jeter at 1B he loses 20 runs based on positional adjustments and goes from 7.5 WAR to 5.5 WAR. So once again, if he was -10 UZR at SS and you make him a neutral defender at first, he's now only worth 6.5 WAR. He'd have to be a GG calibre 1B to break even with the value he was at SS, and that's assuming Jeter was a -10 UZR SS. Once again, if he's even slightly better than that, then there is no way he'd be better at first than at SS.

By playing Jeter at DH he now loses 25 runs of value. So again, a 7.5 WAR SS becomes a 5 WAR DH. Even if you add back 10 runs for defence, you're looking at Jeter as being a 6 WAR DH vs a 7.5 WAR SS.

Clearly, Jeter is at his best as a SS. But that's only looking at Jeter's value to a team. What about the other players?

Left fielders generally hit better than SS's. Don't even need WAR or anything to show this. So by putting Jeter at SS, you give yourself the best two hitters on your team. If you put Jeter at left field, you're pushing a superior hitter out of your lineup, and an inferior option at SS. Think of Matt Holliday as an example. If you have Jeter here, you lose both the glove of Matt Holliday and his superior bat. So you've downgraded on offence and defence in left, and now you've downgraded offence at SS but still not gaining enough defensively to make it worthwhile.

Same deal with DH - think of your David Ortiz here. He can't play any other position. By playing Jeter here, you now have pushed a quality hitter to the bench (as the DH can't play in the field), AND put an inferior option to Jeter at SS.

The bottom line is, despite Jeter's lack of defensive value at SS, his value remains HIGHEST at SS. That's even when you factor in the poor defence. By having Jeter play at a premium position where that kind of offence generally doesn't exist, you allow your team to have the best player at SS, the best player at LF, and the best hitter at DH. Having Jeter at any position other than SS means you're using your second best SS at short, and pushes a key bat, either your LF, 1B or your DH, to the bench. And if the LF/1B is a quality defender you lose those runs saved, and if your DH is a superior hitter to Jeter (which he should be), you lose those runs on offence too. And while your other SS will save more runs on D, he still won't make up for Jeter's overall value because there isn't a chance in hell he comes close to providing as many runs with the bat as Jeter will.

Since 1990 the only player to provide more value as a SS was A-Rod, and nobody else even comes close. Moving Jeter off SS is the single worst possible move anybody could make on a baseball team, because outside of A-Rod, nobody has been better than Jeter at SS.

Um, Game. Set. Match. Well done.